Imagine leaving your home, full of hope for a better future, only to find yourself trapped in a nightmare. That's the tragic reality for many migrant workers, and the story of Jerwin Royupa, a young Filipino man, is a stark reminder of the potential for exploitation. His death in Australia after just five weeks has now prompted a referral to the Australian Federal Police, raising serious questions about the systems designed to protect vulnerable workers.
In 2019, Jerwin Royupa, a 21-year-old agricultural student from the Philippines, arrived in New South Wales (NSW), Australia, brimming with optimism. He was granted a temporary subclass 407 visa, a program intended to provide workplace-based occupational training. Sadly, his dream quickly turned into a nightmare. NSW Deputy State Coroner Rebecca Hosking, after a thorough inquest, concluded that Royupa was "exploited" and subjected to "potentially criminal" conduct during his short time in the country. This is where it gets controversial... because the visa program is supposed to prevent this kind of situation. How did it fail Jerwin?
Tragically, Royupa died in March 2019 after jumping or falling from a moving van driven by his training scheme sponsor - who, due to legal reasons, cannot be named. The coroner's findings revealed that in the days leading up to his death, Royupa had become "increasingly fearful" of this sponsor. On March 14, 2019, the situation reached a breaking point, with Royupa exiting the van after the sponsor allegedly threatened to take him to the airport or the police.
But here's where it gets truly appalling: instead of immediately calling for help when Royupa was lying unconscious on the roadside, the sponsor allegedly disparaged him to a paramedic and then left the scene after being instructed not to. Hosking didn't mince words, describing the sponsor's conduct as "deplorable". Royupa succumbed to his injuries the following day in the Royal Melbourne Hospital, the cause of death being complications from "multiple blunt force injuries", according to Hosking.
The coroner acknowledged the ambiguity surrounding the precise reason why Royupa left the vehicle, but she couldn't dismiss the possibility of a threat. Furthermore, the inquest revealed that the training sponsor was aware of potential financial liabilities if Royupa were to abscond. And this is the part most people miss... Royupa's passport was allegedly withheld from him while he was living and working at the winery. This level of control raises serious red flags about potential coercion and restriction of movement.
Instead of receiving genuine training in his field, Royupa was, according to the coroner, “exclusively” performing manual labour that wasn't related to his studies. He was allegedly forced to work “excessive” hours – up to 60 a week – a far cry from the proposed “training schedule.” He was also reportedly made to work outside in extreme heat without proper clothing or sun protection. The promise of a “generous allowance” turned out to be a cruel joke, with Royupa not receiving any payments during his time in Australia because the sponsor claimed he would be paid after six months. His proposed monthly base salary was a paltry $134.92 for a 10-hour workday, six days a week. Could this be considered modern slavery?
The Department of Home Affairs itself acknowledged through the inquest that approving the training visa was “inappropriate.” What's more, the same documentation provided by the sponsor was rejected in a subsequent nomination after Royupa’s death, with the decision-maker stating they weren't convinced a “genuine” training opportunity was intended. This raises serious questions about the vetting process for these visas and the potential for exploitation. The department claims that refusal rates for the subclass 407 visa are now at 45%, suggesting stricter oversight.
The inquest, the first in Australia to examine forced labour concerns since the criminalization of modern slavery offences in 2013, resulted in six recommendations. The most significant is the referral of the coronial brief of evidence and hearing transcripts to the Australian Federal Police (AFP) for further investigation. Hosking also recommended an internal review by the Home Affairs Minister to identify “lessons learned” and to consider a formal investigation into the department’s role in approving 407 training visas that may have been used to exploit visa holders. Other recommendations included mandatory modern slavery training for NSW police officers working in high-risk areas.
A Department of Home Affairs spokesperson stated they provided full assistance to the inquest and are carefully reviewing the findings and recommendations. They expressed condolences to Royupa's family and friends and stated they are working on strengthened regulations for the training visa to protect visa-holders.
Jerwin Royupa's story is a tragic example of how vulnerable migrant workers can be exploited, even within supposedly regulated systems. The referral to the AFP is a crucial step in seeking justice for Jerwin and preventing similar tragedies in the future. But is it enough? What more can be done to ensure that temporary work visas are not used as a tool for exploitation and that the rights of migrant workers are protected? What are your thoughts on the responsibilities of visa sponsors and the government in preventing these situations? Share your perspective in the comments below.
